Alcohol should be banned

[bagger]

I remember the days when pubs were only allowed to open certain hours. Weekdays 11-30 to 3.00 and 5.30 - 10.30 with 10 minutes drinking up time. Sunday was 12.00-2.00 and 7.00-10.30 if I remember rightly.

The police used to visit the pubs to check for underage drinkers and drunkenness.

People were arrested for being drunk or drunk and disorderly.

There was less tolerance of drunken behaviour by the authorities.

 

It would be nice to go back to those days....

And a ban on cheap booze from corner shops and supermarkets while we're at it. Responsible drinkers managed without cheap shop booze and restricted pub times before and I'm sure they'll do so again.

[Phanerothyme]

I tend to enjoy winding Cyclone up and he loves trying to wind me up. Nothing but a bit of friendly argument. He does so like to choose his facts. As I have said - there are facts that prove both sides of the arguemnet so it all comes down to personal choice.

It's not important.

 

Anyhow - back on topic.

 

Not sure about drugs being shown to be harmless because they have been used for thousands of years. You would possibly have to have known these people before and after drugs to understand.

I know the native american indians use drugs such as opium and cannabis, amongst others, for dream quests, but their usage is very limited. It's not like they went for a dreamquest every other night.

As most underage drinkers get drunk - so turning them from alcohol to opium or such would possibly result in similar misuse. They affect different people in different ways. If you take something that makes you feel good then you want to feel good more often, and so you take the drug more often, and then you want to feel good even more - and so on.

 

For thousands of years people ate people - does not make it a good thing.

People still do eat people, but the numbers are vanishingly small, because it's not good for you.

 

There are many thousands of Catholics across South America that take a psychedelic brew every week - these are not wild eyed hippies, but parents and middle class white collar workers.

 

There are many drugs which simply are not addictive, and where the effects of abuse are much less severe than alcohol.

 

I'm arguing that instead of banning alcohol, the liberalisation of the use of other, less harmful, less addictive, more life affirming yet really enjoyable drugs, would be a better way of reducing the harm from alcohol.

 

I'm not suggesting that

[DragonofAna]

People still do eat people, but the numbers are vanishingly small, because it's not good for you.

 

There are many thousands of Catholics across South America that take a psychedelic brew every week - these are not wild eyed hippies, but parents and middle class white collar workers.

 

There are many drugs which simply are not addictive, and where the effects of abuse are much less severe than alcohol.

 

I'm arguing that instead of banning alcohol, the liberalisation of the use of other, less harmful, less addictive, more life affirming yet really enjoyable drugs, would be a better way of reducing the harm from alcohol.

 

I'm not suggesting that

 

I'm not disagreeing with you really. I think any drug that makes a person want to just venture off into cloud cuckoo land with no thought of harming anyone, vandalising, or generally being a pain in the neck of those who do not participate would be a good thing compared to alcohol.

But seriously - it's not going to happen is it?

Every recreational drug that comes out is pounced upon and outlawed.

[Cyclone]

I'm uncertain as to whether you did either - the article seemed to be casting doubt over the provenance and the results of the research, rather than supporting your point.

 

I've been reading research on alcohol for quite a few years now. Maybe that one wasn't the best example though.

 

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2596-alcohol-health-boost-has-a-kick.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10815-alcohol-may-offer-protection-against-arthritis.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18925424.900-ale-and-hearty-try-the-new-health-tipple.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14920-break-out-the-bubbly-white-wine-may-be-good-for-you.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16121682.000-why-wine-is-good-for-your-brain.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19726370.800-superwine-might-boost-lifespan.html

 

The search function on newscientist isn't very good, but I seem to remember that beer has several benefits including reducing the risk of several types of cancer.

 

Not in excess of course, all these benefits apply to moderate drinkers only, but it seems clear that in moderation alcohol isn't especially harmful and has quite a few beneficial affects.

[milquetoast1]

I've been reading research on alcohol for quite a few years now. Maybe that one wasn't the best example though.

 

The search function on newscientist isn't very good, but I seem to remember that beer has several benefits including reducing the risk of several types of cancer.

 

Not in excess of course, all these benefits apply to moderate drinkers only, but it seems clear that in moderation alcohol isn't especially harmful and has quite a few beneficial affects.

 

It might be Prof Richard Doll's research you are looking for? There is a U-shaped graph of mortality, with higher mortality for teetotallers and higher mortality for heavy drinkers and a lower plateau between them.

 

The interesting thing is that the graph looks like this even if controls are made for other influences so each group have a similar risk profile from other sources.

 

In fact various studies do seem to suggest that the physical affects of drinking alcohol on the body is actually beneficial in moderate amounts.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/article2697975.ece

 

One study found that men drinking between 21 and 30 units of alcohol a week had the lowest mortality rate in Britain. Another concluded that a man would have to drink 63 units a week, or a bottle of wine a day, to face the same risk of death as a teetotaller.

 

It might be that that alcohol has benefits, or perhaps the benefits come from being moderate in general. A teetotallers obsessive avoidance of alcohol might simply be a symptom of unhealthy obsessive behaviour in general.

 

We all know the basics of what's good for us, don't smoke, drink moderately, eat moderately with plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables, exercise moderately etc. We don't need government advice on how many units we can drink, we know when we are drinking excessively.

[Phanerothyme]

I've been reading research on alcohol for quite a few years now. Maybe that one wasn't the best example though.

Especially considering the point you were making to someone else!

 

I think you're correct though - alcohol is beneficial in the right quantities and this has been common knowledge for many centuries, if not millenia. And it can have a positive impact on wider society.

 

Drugs of all kinds including alcohol have a recursive effect when they are used, and these tend to be the problem drugs. They affect your judgement and reasoning and increase your tendency to take more. Taking more further effects your judgement etc.

 

I suspect many people use alcohol to help blot out existential angst, and a significant proportion of them present as alcohol related problems through either illness, violence or crime. The same, I think, is true for opiates and stimulants.

 

Treating the symptoms by banning/liberalising substances only takes in half the problem - treating the causes of boredom, ennui, futility and meaninglessness is much harder.

 

But the liberalisation of psychedelics for the masses could actually treat the symptoms of the angst as well as the causes.

 

It's not a popular position, I'll admit.

[El Robbo]

Legal alcohol has enforced standards of safety, alcohol levels, cleanliness etc. Illegal drugs (which would of course include alcohol under your proposal) do not

 

Umm...so because it's legal it has legal safeguards - what else would you expect? Make something illegal and it no longer has those legal safeguards - if drugs were legal they would have similar types of enforced standards as well.

[El Robbo]

Thinking about this suddenly makes me think we should legalise all drugs. I have just completely changed my stance on that issue from your question.

 

My work here is done